March 7, 2025
City of San Jose
200 East Santa Clara Street
San Jose, CA 95113
Attn: Cort Hitchens Cort.Hitchens@sanjoseca.gov
Re: Comments on Electronic Sign on City-owned Property Project - Willow Street Billboard Site IS/MND
To Environmental Project Manager Cort Hitchens,
The Santa Clara Valley Bird Alliance and the Sierra Club Loma Prieta Chapter are organizations united by our shared commitment to the protection of the environment, nature, and open space. We have been advocating for a reduction of light pollution in the region, and have advocated against electronic billboards and the proliferation of light pollution in San Jose and in other Bay Area cities for many years. We submit the following comments on the Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) for the installation of a back-to-back electronic billboard on City-owned property at the northeast corner of SR-87 (Guadalupe Parkway) and Willow Street.
We believe that the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report should be required for this Project. As described in our comments below, the IS/MND provides insufficient information and analysis to support its claims that the proposed billboards will not have significant and unmitigable impacts on biological resources and aesthetics. In our opinion, the IS/MND fails the "fair argument" test (Laurel Heights Improvement Assoc. v. U.C. Regents (1993) 47 Cal.4th 376) in that its findings are not made on the basis of "substantial evidence" that the Project impacts can be mitigated to a less than significant level. In order to consider and analyze the information necessary to determine the significance of Biological and Aesthetic Impacts, an Environmental Impact Report should be conducted.
We are especially concerned with impacts on the night sky, the fish and wildlife of the Guadalupe River, and migratory birds, since the IS/MND clearly shows that light will be emitted into the sky as well as into the Guadalupe River and its aquatic and riparian ecosystem.
Comment 1: The Project proposes an infeasible mitigation measure to reduce the impacts of light pollution on birds.
The Riparian Corridor Report in Appendix C, on Report page 20, proposes the following mitigation measure. “Images on billboards should not exhibit large expanses of white or light colors at night. Images chosen for the billboard signage should utilize primarily dark backgrounds at night with lighter colors reserved for words or images. The use of lighter colored words and images should also be kept to a minimum at night.”
To implement this proposed biological mitigation measure, the IS/MND proposes to adhere to City Council Policy 6-4 (IS/MND Page 68 section (C) Limitations on Light During and After Construction). This policy includes, “The signs shall utilize warmer colors or display a background with bright text and/or images, and limit white or bright backgrounds.”
We believe that this mitigation/requirement is not feasible. The City has no control on ad-space that billboard companies (such as Outfront Foster Interstate, LLC), lease or rent to advertisers, and has no funds or mechanisms to monitor billboards and enforce warmer background colors on billboard ads that are rented by advertisers. Thus, the potential of the billboards to impact biological resources, including migratory birds, along the Guadalupe River remains significant.
Comment 2: The Project is non-compliant with San Jose Riparian Corridor Policy 6-34.
San Jose’s Riparian Corridor Policy 6-34 includes the following definition. “‘Riparian Project’ means any development or activity that is located within 300 feet of a Riparian Corridor’s top of bank or vegetative edge, whichever is greater, and that requires approval of a Development Permit as defined in Chapter 20.200 of Title 20 of the San José Municipal Code (the Zoning Code), except that projects that only require approval of a Single-Family House Permit under the provisions of the Zoning Code are not subject to this Policy.”
The IS/MND used measurements from aerial imagery, rather than precise measurement, to determine the distance of the Project from the Riparian Corridor of the Guadalupe River. Based on this inadequate measurement methodology, the IS/MND estimates (IS/MND page 67), “the riparian zone of Guadalupe Creek is between 165 and 245 feet from the proposed billboard.” This means that the project should be treated as a Riparian Project.
The billboards are expected to spill light into the creek and its riparian corridor (IS/MND pages 10-12, Image 3: Boundary of Night Illuminance of 0.3 Foot-Candles Using Focused Light Technology, Image 4: Billboard Output in Foot-Candles, Image 5: Light Output on Surrounding Object Surfaces).
This is impermissible per Section A4 of Policy 6-34, Materials and Lighting.
Section 4-a. “New development should use materials and lighting that are designed and constructed to reduce light and glare impacts to Riparian Corridors. For example, the use of bright colors, and glossy, reflective, see through or glare producing Building and material finishes is discouraged on Buildings and Structures.”
The Project fails this standard because electronic billboards, by their nature, increase light and glare in the environment.
Section 4-b. “Lighting should not be directed into Riparian Corridors.”
The Project fails this standard because it will shine or spill light into the river and its riparian corridor.
In addition, the billboards are incompatible with section B of Policy 6-34, Bird-Safe Design.
Section B5. “Avoid or minimize up-lighting and spotlights”. Since the billboards are expected to cast light upwards, they are incompatible with this policy.
Section B6. “Turn non-emergency lighting off, or shield it, at night to minimize light from buildings that is visible to birds, especially during bird migration season (February - May and August - November).”
Migratory birds fly during the night. Close to dawn, they alight, and stop to rest and refuel. To avoid attracting migratory birds to stop over in urban areas. To mitigate impacts to migratory birds and comply with Section B6 of Policy 6-34, we suggest the following modification to programming:
Use Real time data from BirdCast1 to trigger a turn-off of the billboards at sunset when migration is listed as “high” for Santa Clara County.
The Riparian Corridor Policy goes to great lengths to prevent spill of lighting into the river and its ecosystems. For example, for active recreational uses that include night-lighted facilities, Policy 6-34 states, “Night-lighted facilities should have a larger setback – 200 to 300 feet is preferred.” Since the actual setback is unknown, we ask for a mitigation measure that requires a minimum setback of 200 ft from the riparian corridor for any tall, lit structure, including billboards.
Comment 3: The IS/MND fails to adequately address the impacts of light pollution on fish movement.
While this reach of the Guadalupe River is not designated Critical Habitat for any species including Chinook salmon and steelhead trout, these fish may still need to navigate this part of the Guadalupe River in order to reach upper reaches or migrate towards the Bay. Light pollution has been shown to affect the behavior of fish2, and the potential impacts of artificial light at night should be analyzed specifically for this section of the River with a wider, watershed-impacts lens. The IS/MND must demonstrate that all impacts have been reduced to an insignificant level. Without analyzing the impact of light in the creek on fish behavior and their ability to navigate this section of the River, the IS/MND cannot assert that there will be no unavoidable, permanent impacts to fish (including steelhead).
Fish and wildlife in this area are dependent on the relatively dark and narrow riparian corridor for movement and migration. Incremental and cumulative increase in ambient light is likely to disrupt their migration, with the potential of limiting activity hours, with detrimental and cumulative results.
Migration is a crucial event in the steelhead life cycle, which travels between the Bay and its breeding areas in the Guadalupe River system. Downstream migration brings young fry from their hatching area to the Bay, where they feed and mature. While water quality and quantity are indeed critical to this threatened species’ persistence in the River, the addition of artificial light at night (ALAN) impacts on rhythmic components such as migratory behavior is likely to contribute a significant risk factor and adversely impact steelhead in the Guadalupe River.
Furthermore, steelhead feed on insects (aquatic Macroinvertebrates, see https://fishbio.com/field-notes/population-dynamics/stuck-middle-insects-food-web). As discussed above, contemporary scientific evidence shows that attraction to light has a devastating and direct impact on insect numbers and diversity, and indirect effects to entire ecosystems. This science should also apply to the aquatic insects that are essential to the food web in the Guadalupe River.
It is reasonable to expect that increased visibility of light from the riparian and aquatic ecosystem of the Guadalupe River will impact the migratory behavior of the threatened steelhead and reduce their food source (insects). The direct, indirect and cumulative impacts to fish (as reviewed in the attachments and references we provided) may contribute to the hazards that challenge steelhead survival in the river.
We believe that we have a fair argument, based on substantial evidence, that the Project will have significant unavoidable impacts to the riparian and aquatic systems of the Guadalupe River. Artificial light at night (ALAN) generated by billboards also has the potential to harm steelhead and impede wildlife migration in the River’s aquatic and riparian corridor. We maintain that the finding that the project will cause no significant unavoidable impacts to the environment cannot be made, therefore a full, independent EIR is needed.
Comment 4: The IS/MND does not analyze the impacts on species such as the western pond turtle which may use habitat in this reach of the Guadalupe River.
The IS/MND acknowledges that it “is anticipated that this reach of the Guadalupe River provides high habitat values and functions and likely is habitat for a variety of native plants and wildlife species such as the western pond turtle and nesting birds, thus it is important to ensure that projects in the vicinity of the Guadalupe River are designed to minimally impact the riparian zone and channel habitat.” However, the IS/MND limits mitigation to construction- related impacts and fails to study or address the impacts of light pollution on the western pond turtle.
Since the impacts on the western pond turtle are not analyzed, the IS/MND cannot confidently assert that western pond turtles that occur on the site after construction will not be significantly impacted by artificial light at night.
Comment 5: The IS/MND does not analyze the contribution of the billboards to skyglow, and does not adequately mitigate the contribution of the Project lighting (Project level or cumulatively) to sky glow.
As a result, significant, unavoidable impacts on the aesthetics of the night sky, as well as on human culture are not disclosed.
Skyglow is defined as the brightening of the night sky caused by cumulative artificial lighting. LED lighting, including electronic signs, has accelerated the degradation of the night sky, and this Project could potentially be a significant, unavoidable impact that requires the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report.
Seeing stars twinkling in the night sky is fundamental to our culture and has fundamental aesthetic value. Indeed, the song “Twinkle Twinkle Little Star” is among the most popular nursery rhymes globally and in the United States. However, the impacts of electronic signs in San Jose on the visibility of stars is not discussed as a cultural or aesthetic value. We consider the incremental increase of skyglow to be a significant, unavoidable and environmentally devastating impact, yet the contribution of the Project to skyglow, on a Project basis and cumulatively, and the loss of visibility of the stars is not discussed in the IS/MND.
The visibility of the night sky is also fundamental to the function of the Lick Observatory, a prominent scientific institution which is part of San Jose’s cultural heritage and learning experience. The proposed signs will interfere with the education of children and adults, and with scientific research. There are valued cultural elements which are not included in the analysis and remain significant and unavoidable.
The IS/MND provides no analysis of the contribution of the billboards to skyglow and offers “mitigation technologies” (IS/MND page 9, section 3.2.2 - Vertical Light Dispersion). These mitigations include an upper angle of 14 degrees, acknowledging that light will be shining upwards, despite the overall downward bias. The project’s contribution to the cumulative impacts of skyglow should be fully analyzed as potential impacts in the IS/MND. The absence of this analysis is a critical gap in the IS/MND.
Sincerely,
Shani Kleinhaus
Environmental Advocate
Santa Clara Valley Bird Alliance
Dashiell Leeds
Conservation Coordinator
Sierra Club Loma Prieta Chapter
2 Ecological Consequences of Artificial Night Lighting, 2006. Chapter 11 Artificial Night Lighting and Fish, by B. Nightingale, T. Longcore and C. Rich. https://www.resolutionmineeis.us/sites/default/files/references/nightingale-longcore-simenstad-2006.pdf